I've been watching the History Channel a lot this week on their special highlighting all 47 Presidents we've had. It calls itself the "ultimate guide" to the Presidents, but it's mostly a great primer on all the Presidents.

Anyway, it's been a while since we've done this.

But who are the best 5 Presidents in American history in your opinion, and who were 5 of the worst? Do your best to explain.

He's saying that there were mass casualties for a war that may have been to serve Lincoln's self interests versus the interests of the union. It's an interesting point. I would still argue that regardless, the approach we took was far better than any alternative, even if the reasoning was ill-intentioned.

He missed that because he was too busy going Khan on me because I insulted his intelligence.

I don't understand the love affair with Lincoln. He completely ignored the constitution. The man treated the executive branch as a dictatorship. He pushed the country into a civil war. He completely disregarded civil liberties. Lincoln's presidency was the closest this country has ever been to tyranny. Had he not been assassinated, we probably wouldn't be a free country today.

eh, FDR also doesn't belong on any top president lists either. people completely ignore the fact that he tried to pack the courts to get all of his radical programs through. he's really one of the originators of the welfare state that is the modern USA

He dismantled our armed forces while continually giving the greatest military power on earth the finger. FAIL! But the Louisiana Purchase sort of makes up for it.

I have great respect for him as an intellectual and inventor, some respect for his as a founder, very little as president, and pretty much none as a man. He was a coward and a hypocrite. Another one who was all for bloody revolution, as long as everybody but him was doing the bleeding.

What a way to characterize the beginning of the American Civil War! It's like you're trying to be one of those associates you so despise.

Well, you seem so tied down by specifics - I thought I might give you a different point of view (which you'll obviously ignore, but what the hell).

I'm well aware that the war had been brewing for decades. That bloody fighting had already been going on in Missouri and Kansas for years. That there was little chance to avoid secession from the minute Lincoln was elected. But a less zealous leader might have avoided all that bloodshed, and a better commander-in-chief might have found ways to limit it. It's long since over and done with now, but nobody ever seems to hold Lincoln accountable for the rivers of blood that ran through this country during his presidency, and that annoys me. Is it better to live as a slave or die on a battlefield? Most of the people who died for the Union cared little for slavery. Most of the people who died for the Confederacy didn't own slaves. Maybe their deaths would mean a bit more to some people if they weren't displayed in a few muted, black and white photographs.

Well, you seem so tied down by specifics - I thought I might give you a different point of view (which you'll obviously ignore, but what the hell).

I'm well aware that the war had been brewing for decades. That bloody fighting had already been going on in Missouri and Kansas for years. That there was little chance to avoid secession from the minute Lincoln was elected. But a less zealous leader might have avoided all that bloodshed, and a better commander-in-chief might have found ways to limit it. It's long since over and done with now, but nobody ever seems to hold Lincoln accountable for the rivers of blood that ran through this country during his presidency, and that annoys me. Is it better to live as a slave or die on a battlefield? Most of the people who died for the Union cared little for slavery. Most of the people who died for the Confederacy didn't own slaves. Maybe their deaths would mean a bit more to some people if they weren't displayed in a few muted, black and white photographs.

The fair question to ask, though, is if the only way to unify the country was for the Union to win. And seeing that the Union was struggling early in the war, the only way to win was to win big in the later battles, and the only way to win big was massive bloodshed and destruction.

I honestly don't think anything would have been resolved without mass devastation. The Union had to be a clear winner. Who knows where we would be today if the Union lost to the Confederacy.